[cvsnt] Re: "cvs update" avoiding files with local changes?

Johan Holmberg holmberg at iar.se
Wed Feb 22 08:57:01 GMT 2006


Gerhard Fiedler <lists at connectionbrazil.com> writes:
>
> Johan Holmberg wrote:
> 
> > I wonder if it is possible to run "cvs update" to fetch new changes
> > from the server, but without fetching changes for files that
> > are also changed locally?
> > 
> > I would like to "hold" updates for such files for consideration later,
> > even if a merge would be successful.
> 
> AFAIK there is no built-in command line option to do that. 
> 
[...]
> 
> OTOH this doesn't seem to make much sense. If there are changes in files
> you have modified and changes in files you have not modified, chances are
> the changes are related and it doesn't help you a lot to get only the
> changes in files you haven't modified. This may easily break the build.
> 
> If you don't want to update yet, just don't. [...]

I should perhaps have explained my situation in more detail. My
scenario (in this case) is to use "cvs update" in a "batch setting" to
update all files in a whole directory tree. The files are *self
contained*, so the usual dependency problems don't arise. When there
is un-committed local changes, it is for a good reason. The most
important thing (in batch mode) is to *avoid* overwriting these
changes, not even with a successful merge. I want those changes to be
managed interactively later.

I admit that this usage is a bit "unusual", but it makes sense to me.

I have thought about switching to some "mirroring software". It would
probably fit nicely with the "batch mode". But then I would loose the
nice things with CVS when working in "interactive mode": using diff,
accessing file history, commiting changes, etc.

/Johan Holmberg




More information about the cvsnt mailing list